The Bombay High Court convened an urgent late-evening sitting at the Chief Justice’s residence to address the requisitioning of court staff for BMC election duty. It restrained Municipal Commissioner Bhushan Gagrani from acting on his December 29 directive letter.
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court held an urgent late evening hearing at the Chief Justice’s residence to address concerns over court employees being assigned duties for the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections.
In an order delivered, the Court barred Municipal Commissioner-cum-District Election Officer Bhushan Gagrani from proceeding with his December 29 letter refusing exemption to judicial staff or enforcing directives requiring them to participate in election work.
Acting suo motu, a Division Bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Ashwin D Bhobe took note of a December 22 communication issued directly to subordinate court personnel, instructing them to report for election duty on December 30 between 3 PM and 5 PM.
The Court further prohibited the BMC from sending any correspondence to High Court or subordinate court staff for the purpose of requisitioning them for election assignments.
The Bench stated,
“We hereby direct the Municipal Commissioner, BMC-cum-District Election Officer not to take any action pursuant to the ex-parte communication dated December 22, directly sent to the Court staff. The Municipal Commissioner is restrained from issuing any communication to the Court staff of High Court or subordinate Courts requisitioning their services for election duty”.
Also Read: Goregaon-Mulund Link Road Project: Supreme Court Agreed to Decide on BMC’s Tree Felling
Additionally, the Court directed Municipal Commissioner Bhushan Gagrani to submit a personal affidavit explaining the authority and legal basis under which he summoned district judiciary staff for election work.
The Bench recorded that the In-charge Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai had earlier requested exemption for court personnel, relying on a 2008 Administrative Judges’ Committee decision and a 2009 general order of the High Court. A similar representation was also sent by the Registrar (Inspection II) on December 26, enclosing the general order, yet the Municipal Commissioner still issued his December 29 refusal letter.
The Court emphasized that under Article 235 of the Constitution, the High Court has complete control and supervisory authority over subordinate courts and their employees. It also referred to Articles 243K and 243ZA, as well as Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act, noting that although several authorities are empowered to requisition staff for election duties, High Courts and subordinate courts are not included in the entities listed under Section 159(2).
When the matter was heard, BMC’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the December 29 communication, but the Bench rejected the request and instead sought a detailed affidavit from the Municipal Commissioner. Affidavits were also sought from the State Election Commission, the Election Commission of India, and the State of Maharashtra.
The suo motu matter will be heard next on January 5, 2026.
Additional Government Pleader Jyoti Chavan represented the State, while advocates Komal Punjabi and Joel Carlos appeared for BMC, and advocate Sachindra Shetye represented the State Election Commission.
Case Title: In Re : Order dated 29th December 2025 passed by the Municipal
Commissioner, Brihanmumbai.
Read Attachment: